California Cap-and-trade Could Endanger Rainforest Peoples

SACRAMENTO, Calif.
– Under California’s new cap-and-trade program,
the state is considering allowing a controversial form of
carbon credits that have been rejected by the European Union
as ineffective and potentially harmful to rainforests in
developing countries. Now an international coalition of
environmental groups including Friends of the Earth,
Greenpeace and Sierra Club California is urging Gov. Jerry
Brown to reject the so-called REDD credits, which could
endanger the lives and livelihoods of indigenous forest
peoples.

Since California signed a memorandum of
understanding in 2010 with Chiapas, Mexico and Acre, Brazil,
the state Air Resources Board has been working to forge an
agreement to allow California industries, under the Global
Warming Solutions Act (AB 32), to offset their pollution by
purchasing Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and
Degradation credits that supposedly promote rainforest
conservation in those areas.

A consulting group to the ARB
recently released recommendations for the program and is
accepting public
comments through May 7. The environmental groups’ letter
to Gov. Brown and the ARB -- on the heels of letters
of protests from Indigenous groups in Acre
and Chiapas
-- points out deep flaws with the proposal:

[The] proposal
is not only unlikely to deliver real, additional and
permanent emission reductions, but it would also prevent
Californians from getting the benefits of AB 32 at home. By
allowing enterprises to buy international forest offsets,
the amount of industrial emissions within the state
would be greater than otherwise allowed by law, exposing
people here in California to greater health and
environmental risks, and preventing progressive Californian
companies from benefitting from new technologies and
innovations.

“REDD looks like a forest protection
program,” said Jeff Conant, international forests
campaigner with Friends of the Earth U.S., “but it’s
not. It’s a carbon offset scheme. It fails to address
the real causes of both deforestation and the climate
crisis.”

“We need to reduce both deforestation and
industrial emissions,” said Roman Czebiniak, senior
climate and forest policy analyst at Greenpeace
International. “Allowing major industries to merely
replace one with the other not only puts the climate at
great risk but also exposes Californians to greater
pollution here at home.”

Europe’s emissions trading
system, the largest carbon market in the world -- itself
beset by scandals and failure to reduce emissions in Europe
-- does not accept REDD credits. The EU says reductions in
carbon emissions from forest preservation are impossible to
verify accurately, that preserving one forest in one place
may only drive deforestation to another area, and that
industrial pollution remains in the atmosphere for centuries
while forests are more vulnerable to short-term
changes.

Tropical forests have unique social, economic and
cultural significance to those who live in and depend on
them for their livelihoods. But REDD projects like the one
California is considering raise serious concerns about
violations of the rights of forest dwellers.

"Forest
carbon projects are causing grave human rights abuses,
including evictions, land grabs, jailing, persecution of
activists and violations of the United Nations Declaration
on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples,” said Alberto
Saldamando, a spokesman for the Indigenous Environmental
Network. "California should not repeat its mistakes of the
past with regard to indigenous peoples, in order to let
polluters continue to pollute."

Organizations in Acre
and Chiapas
who sent letters to California policymakers last week
denounced the proposed program as “neocolonial” and
“incoherent.” Objections have also been sent by Friends
of the Earth Latin America and Caribbean and Oilwatch
International urging that “common sense requires that
we end fossil fuel addiction, not let corporations continue
to profit while setting the planet
ablaze.”

Environmental justice advocates also pointed
out that communities in the shadow of polluting industries,
like Chevron’s refinery in Richmond and Shell’s in
Martinez, see REDD as a failure to address their concerns as
well.

"We have struggled to ensure that ARB addresses the
needs of low-income communities and communities of color in
AB 32 implementation,” said Strela Cervas, coordinator of
the California Environmental Justice Alliance. “But they
have continued to pass harmful and ineffective offset
programs that only benefit big polluters. ARB has shown
little concern for communities of color here at home-- how
can we expect them to ensure a California REDD program will
protect the rights of communities abroad?"

Join the Scoop Citizen Community

20 years of independent publishing is a milestone, but your support is essential to keep Scoop thriving. We are building on our offering with thedig.nz our new In-depth Engaged Journalism platform. Now, more than ever sustainable financial support of the Scoop Foundation for Public Interest Journalism will help to keep these vital and participatory media services running.
Find out more and join us:

Poverty, discrimination and repeated acts of police brutality all help to explain the rage being expressed on the streets of American cities right now after the death of George Floyd but there is a more immediate cause as well : Decades of research ... More>>

The UN Special Rapporteur on human rights and the environment, David Boyd, says transformative actions are urgently required to protect the environment and human rights, and address the drivers of climate disruption, biodiversity loss, toxic pollution ... More>>